Distinguished
Distinguished by Hawkins v. Payne, 129 Okla. 243 (1928)
Pettis v. Johnston, 78 Okla. 277, 190 Pac. 681, is distinguishable from the case at bar in fact, but it supports the rule here followed in paragraph 2, page 284, in holding:
The opinion
dissents from that part of the opinion which holds extrinsic evidence admissible to contradict the recital in the judgment of service of process though no fraud is charged.